The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews
Open accessAbstract
Research questionWhat is known about the barriers to, and facilitators of, fruit and vegetable intake among children aged 4-10 years?Synthesis of quantitative and qualitative studies Controlled trials 1. Application of inclusion criteria 2. Quality assessment (n=33) 3. Data extraction 4. Quantitative synthesis (n=21) Qualitative trials 1. Application of inclusion criteria 2. Quality assessment (n=8) 3. Data extraction 4. Quantitative synthesis (n=8) Fig 1 Stages of the review Evidence for Policy
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“In general, the use to date of interpretive approaches to synthesis has been confined to the synthesis of qualitative research only [6-8].”
From Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups (2006) · cites this paper as [8]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Methods for including qualitative and quantitative evidence in systematic reviews developed by the EPPI Centre at the Institute of Education, London, have involved refinements and extensions of conventional systematic review methodology [6-8], and have limited their application of interpretive techniques to synthesis of qualitative evidence.”
From Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups (2006) · cites this paper as [8]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(2000) · Cited by 9,198
Qualitative Research: Rigour and qualitative research
Mays, N., & Pope, C. (1995) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.311.6997.109 · Cited by 2,715
Methodological Issues in Combining Diverse Study Types in Systematic Reviews
Harden, A., & Thomas, J. (2005) · International Journal of Social Research Methodology · doi:10.1080/13645570500155078 · Cited by 371
Self-citationHarden, A., Garcia, J., Oliver, S., Rees, R., Shepherd, J., Brunton, G., & Oakley, A. (2004) · Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health · doi:10.1136/jech.2003.014829 · Cited by 328
Self-citationSexual health education interventions for young people: a methodological review
Oakley, A., Fullerton, D. A., Holland, J., Arnold, S., France-Dawson, M., Kelley, P., & McGrellis, S. (1995) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.310.6973.158 · Cited by 250
Self-citationQualitative research in systematic reviews
Dixon‐Woods, M., & Fitzpatrick, R. M. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7316.765 · Cited by 232
(2003) · UCL Discovery (University College London) · Cited by 162
Self-citationRoberts, K. A., Dixon‐Woods, M., Fitzpatrick, R. M., Abrams, K. R., & Jones, D. R. (2002) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(02)11560-1 · Cited by 159
Peer-delivered health promotion for young people: A systematic review of different study designs
Harden, A., Oakley, A., & Oliver, S. R. (2001) · Health Education Journal · doi:10.1177/001789690106000406 · Cited by 155
Self-citationLOEVINSOHN, B. P. (1990) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/19.4.788 · Cited by 131
Qualitative research in health care: II. A structured review and evaluation of studies
Boulton, M., Fitzpatrick, R., & Swinburn, C. (1996) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.1996.tb00041.x · Cited by 109
Contemporary Studies of the Effectiveness of Social Work
Macdonald, G. M., Sheldon, B., & Gillespie, J. (1992) · The British Journal of Social Work · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjsw.a055920 · Cited by 101
Ten Criteria for Evaluating Qualitative Research Proposals
Cobb, A. K., & Hagemaster, J. N. (1987) · Journal of Nursing Education · doi:10.3928/0148-4834-19870401-04 · Cited by 94
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Peersman G Oliver S Oakley A . EPPI-Centre review guidelines: data collections for the EPIC database. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London, 1997.
- 1996, Criteria for the evaluation of qualitative research papers., Med Sociol News, 22, 69
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-8-45 · Cited by 9,312
Self-citationSystematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide
(2006) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.43-5664 · Cited by 4,083
Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care
Tacconelli, E. (2010) · The Lancet Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(10)70065-7 · Cited by 3,270
Dixon-Woods, M., Cavers, D., Agarwal, S., Annandale, E., Arthur, A., Harvey, J., Hsu, R., Katbamna, S., Olsen, R., Smith, L., et al. (2006) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-6-35 · Cited by 2,289
Pluye, P., & Hong, Q. N. (2014) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182440 · Cited by 1,363
Metadata
- Authors
- Thomas, J., Harden, A., Oakley, A., Oliver, S., Sutcliffe, K., Rees, R., Brunton, G., & Kavanagh, J.
- Affiliations
- University of London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Thomas, James
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2004-04-22
- Volume
- 328
- Issue
- 7446
- Pages
- 1010-1012
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- PMC
- PMC404509
- OpenAlex
- W2015804289
- Cited by
- 515
- References
- 13
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 41
- FWCI
- 6.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UEL Research Repository (University of East London) (acceptedVersion)
- UEL Research Repository (University of East London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nd)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Keywords
- fruit and vegetable intake, children, barriers and facilitators, dietary behavior, mixed methods synthesis, systematic review methodology
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Review Literature as Topic, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Biomedical Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
